当前位置: X-MOL 学术Journal of Personality and Social Psychology › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Because excellencism is more than good enough: On the need to distinguish the pursuit of excellence from the pursuit of perfection.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology ( IF 6.4 ) Pub Date : 2022-02-24 , DOI: 10.1037/pspp0000411
Patrick Gaudreau 1 , Benjamin J I Schellenberg 2 , Alexandre Gareau 3 , Kristina Kljajic 1 , Stéphanie Manoni-Millar 1
Affiliation  

An unresolved and controversial issue in the perfectionism literature is whether perfectionism is beneficial, harmful, or unneeded. The model of excellencism and perfectionism (MEP) was recently developed to address this question by distinguishing the pursuit of perfection from the pursuit of excellence (Gaudreau, 2019). In this article, we report the results of the first empirical test of the core assumptions of the MEP. Across five studies (total N = 2,157), we tested the conceptual, functional, and developmental distinctiveness of excellencism and perfectionism. In Study 1, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses with two samples supported the hypothesized two-factor structure of the newly developed Scale of Perfectionism and Excellencism (SCOPE). Study 2 provided evidence of convergent and discriminant validity from scores obtained from the SCOPE, and showed that, over and above excellencism, perfectionism was not associated with additional benefits (e.g., life satisfaction) or reduced harms (e.g., depression). Studies 3-4 focused on the academic achievement of undergraduates and showed that, compared to excellence strivers, perfection strivers more often aimed for perfect A+ grades (Study 3), but in fact achieved worse grades (Study 4). Study 5 adopted a four-wave longitudinal design with undergraduates and showed that excellencism and perfectionism were associated with an upward and a downward spiral of academic development. Overall, the results support the core assumptions of the MEP and show that perfectionism is either unneeded or harmful. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译:

因为精益求精是绰绰有余:关于需要区分追求卓越和追求完美。

完美主义文献中一个未解决且有争议的问题是完美主义是有益的、有害的还是不需要的。最近开发了卓越主义和完美主义模型 (MEP),通过区分追求完美和追求卓越来解决这个问题 (Gaudreau, 2019)。在本文中,我们报告了对 MEP 核心假设的第一次实证检验的结果。在五项研究(总 N = 2,157)中,我们测试了卓越主义和完美主义的概念、功能和发展独特性。在研究 1 中,对两个样本的探索性和验证性因素分析支持了新开发的完美主义和卓越主义量表 (SCOPE) 的假设双因素结构。研究 2 从 SCOPE 获得的分数提供了收敛效度和区分效度的证据,并表明,除了卓越主义之外,完美主义与额外的好处(例如,生活满意度)或减少的伤害(例如,抑郁症)无关。研究 3-4 侧重于本科生的学业成绩,结果表明,与追求卓越的人相比,追求完美的人更多地追求完美的 A+ 成绩(研究 3),但实际上成绩更差(研究 4)。研究 5 对本科生采用了四波纵向设计,表明卓越主义和完美主义与学术发展的上升和下降螺旋相关。总体而言,结果支持 MEP 的核心假设,并表明完美主义要么是不必要的,要么是有害的。(PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2022 APA,
更新日期:2022-02-24
down
wechat
bug